انتظارات پدر و مادر و اختلالات اضطرابی دوران کودکی: ویژگی های روان سنجی مقیاس انتظارات والدین
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|34814||2004||21 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Journal of Anxiety Disorders, Volume 18, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 89–109
The current study examined the psychometric properties of the Parental Expectancies Scale (PES) in childhood anxiety disorder and normative samples. The PES is a 20-item self-report instrument that assesses five dimensions of parental expectancies in academic, extra-curricular, household, social, and general success areas. Results indicated that the PES has high test–retest reliability and internal consistency. Regarding validity, PES subscale scores discriminated clinical and normative groups. Principal component and confirmatory factor analyses supported the construct validity of the scale. The PES appears to be a reliable and valid instrument for quantifying parental expectancies. Implications as to case formulation and prescriptive treatment planning with anxious youth are discussed.
Research has demonstrated that unrealistic parental expectations and attributions of children may contribute to dysfunctional parent–child interactions (e.g., Dix & Grusec, 1985 and Joiner & Wagner, 1996). The majority of studies addressing parental expectancies has primarily focused on academic and general developmental progress (e.g., Eisen & Drabman, 1993; Parsons, Adler, & Kazcala, 1982). Fewer studies have examined parental expectancies related to specific childhood externalizing (e.g., Baden & Howe, 1992, Dix & Lochman, 1990 and Strassberg, 1995) and internalizing disorders (e.g., Cobham, Dadds, & Spence, 1998; Kortlander, Kendall, & Panichelli-Mindell, 1997). Regarding parental expectancies in children exhibiting oppositional and/or non-compliant behaviors, Strassberg (1995) examined mothers of boys (8–10 years old) with and without behavior problems. The Conflict Tactics Scale (Straus, 1979) was used to validate group differences and to identify parental discipline methods (e.g., verbal aggression, spanking). Mothers responded to videotaped stimuli of child behavior cues differing in degree of compliance. The four stimulus conditions (i.e., compliance, bargaining, complaining, and opposition) were successfully classified by uninformed raters. Results revealed that mothers of children with behavior problems rated the boys more negatively in response to both clear and ambiguous compliance cues. In particular, when ambiguity was present, mothers of boys with behavior problems were more likely to attribute defiant intent toward the child and experienced greater anger than mothers of boys without behavior problems. These findings suggest that mothers of boys with behavior problems are more likely to view their children as inherently oppositional in nature. Such a response style facilitates the likelihood that mothers will view their children’s behavior negatively, regardless of the particular behavior cues generated by the child. A similar pattern of pessimistic expectancies and/or attributions has emerged in parents of children with inattentive-overactive behaviors (e.g., Johnston & Freeman, 1997; Johnston, Reynolds, Freeman, & Geller, 1998; Sobol, Ashbourne, Earn, & Cunningham, 1989). For example, Johnston and Freeman (1997) examined attributions and reactions of parents of children with and without ADHD. Parents responded to written vignettes, recalled incidents, and videotapes of their child’s behavior. Overall, results revealed that parents of children with ADHD reacted more negatively to their children’s inattentive-overactive and oppositional-defiant behaviors compared to parents of children without ADHD. More specifically, parents of children with ADHD attributed their child’s disruptive behaviors to internal and stable causes whereas prosocial behaviors were attributed to external and less stable causes. This pattern did not emerge for parents of children without ADHD. Recent work in the area of childhood internalizing disorders (Cobham et al., 1998 and Kortlander et al., 1997) suggests that parents of anxious youth also report pessimistic expectations about their children’s social, academic, and health-related functioning. For example, Kortlander et al. (1997) examined the expectations and coping patterns of mothers of children with (n=40) and without (n=40) DSM-III-R ( American Psychiatric Association, 1987) anxiety disorders (e.g., overanxious, separation anxiety, or avoidant disorders). Maternal expectations and coping ratings were measured via thought listing procedure ( Sanders & Dadds, 1992) and a modified version of the Coping Questionnaire-Parent form (CQ-P; Kendall, 1994), respectively. Results revealed that mothers of children with anxiety disorders expected their children to cope more poorly (e.g., become upset, unable to soothe oneself) than mothers of children without anxiety disorders. Such pessimistic expectancies translated to less maternal confidence in their children’s abilities to perform task-related behaviors during a stressful situation (i.e., a 5-min videotaped speech about themselves). The authors suggested that lowered maternal expectations for children’s coping may foster overprotective parenting and inadvertently help to maintain childhood anxiety. Cobham et al. (1998) examined the relationship between parental anxiety and expectations in children with and without anxiety disorders. Seventy-three children (ages 7–14) were assigned to one of three groups based on diagnostic status (i.e., anxiety disorders, externalizing disorders, normal controls). Within the anxiety disorders group, children were placed in one of two subgroups based on self-reported parental anxiety (i.e., child anxiety group only or child and parent anxiety group). Child and parent self-reported anxiety was measured by the Revised Children’s Manifest Scale (RCMAS; Reynolds & Richman, 1978) and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI; Spielberger, 1973). Results revealed no differences in children’s expectations of their future performance between the child anxiety group and the child and parent anxiety group. However, findings demonstrated that parents in the child and parent anxiety group expected their children to be more anxious and to choose avoidant solutions as compared to parents in the child anxiety group only. The authors suggested that parental anxiety might fuel pessimistic expectations and, as a result, help to maintain childhood anxiety. The purpose of the present study was to examine the specific variable of parental expectancies in both clinically anxious and normal children using the Parental Expectancies Scale (PES). It was hypothesized that the PES would possess adequate internal consistency and test–retest reliability. In addition, the discriminant validity of the PES would be shown by its ability to distinguish between members of clinical and normative groups. Consistent with previous research on childhood internalizing and externalizing disorders, it was hypothesized that parents of anxious youth would report lower expectations for their children’s academic, social, and home-related functioning. No such bias was expected for parents of children in the normative group. Finally, the construct validity of the PES would be demonstrated in two ways. First, via principal components analysis (PCA) to determine the number of independent dimensions accounting for most of the variance. Second, via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to examine the hypothesized three component solution. The three hypothesized factors included the following dimensions: an achievement factor (composed of items from the general success and academic subscales), a peer-related factor (composed of items from the social and extra-curricular subscales), and a home activities factor (composed of items on the household subscale).